Specifically, elites across the political spectrum tend to be cosmopolitan internationalists, and the grassroots less so. Politicians know this, too — that’s why both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama campaigned in 2012 posturing as quasi-protectionists.
Yet the elites in both parties are free traders, and for open borders, while the grassroots in both parties are more skeptical of both.
It’s similar when it comes to humanitarian military interventions. For instance, in early March 2011, just before President Obama decided to invade Libya, Pew asked 1,001 Americans whether “the United States has a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Libya between government forces and anti-government groups.” Only 27 percent said yes. By 77 percent to 16 percent, Americans opposed bombing Libya’s air defenses.
For the elites, open borders, free trade, multilateralism, and a little war here and there all make perfect sense. For the working class guy whose kids’ public school is now half Spanish-speaking, or who sees his wages falling thanks to cheap immigrant labor or his employer chasing cheaper wages overseas, a world without borders isn’t so obviously beneficial.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member